The prosecutor in Oscar Pistorius’ murder trial on Friday accused the athlete of intentionally gunning down a terrified Reeva Steenkamp as she argued with him from behind a locked bathroom door, calling it “the only reasonable explanation” for the killing.
“She wasn’t scared of an intruder,” prosecutor Gerrie Nel told Pistorius, 27, who has claimed he thought an intruder had gotten into his bathroom and that he was protecting his girlfriend.

Steenkamp’s mother, June, is comforted by family lawyer Dup de Bruyn.APFamily members and journalists attend the trial.AFP/Getty Images

“She was scared of you. She was standing right in front of the toilet door, talking to you, when you shot her. That’s the only reasonable explanation why you shot her in the head.”

Nel said Pistorius’ version of what happened early on Valentine’s Day 2013 was “so far-fetched” that it was highly “improbable.”

The veteran prosecutor drilled Pistorius with questions, demanding to know why he didn’t ask Steenkamp, 29, if she heard the noise he thought was a burglar.

“She was awake. Did you not ask her: ‘Reeva, did you hear that?’ That’s a reasonable thing to do,” Nel said. “You were in a situation of danger, why did you not confer? I say a reasonable person would have looked where Reeva was, that she was safe, but you didn’t — you just grabbed your gun. On your own version, you did not find out that she was OK or scared.”

A defiant Pistorius fought back as the two squared off in a heated and dramatic exchange. “My whole being was fixated on this person in the bathroom,” Pistorius said.

But Nel asked why he ran ­toward the danger instead of making sure Steenkamp was safe and fleeing the apartment.

“You’re vulnerable, but you go towards the danger. Why would you do that?” he said.

“Because if I stayed where I was, Reeva and I would have been in danger,” he replied.

“If you had stayed in that room, Reeva would still be alive,” Nel answered.

Pistorius said his fear of South Africa’s rampant crime prompted him to grab one of his guns.

“Things happen every day,” he said, adding it was instinctual for him to try to protect his girlfriend, a TV personality and model.

“I find your instinct strange. Instinct would have been to make sure Reeva was safe,” Nel said. “What was your intention? You got your gun and you released the safety mechanism. Why? You wanted to shoot,” he said, leaning over the Paralympian known as Blade Runner.

“There’s a massive difference between being ready for a confrontation and wanting to shoot someone,” Pistorius responded.

Nel then questioned what he called the “most improbable” part of Pistorius’ version.

Pistorius’ sister Aimee breaks down in court.ReutersSteenkamp and Pistorius in February 2013.Reuters

“Reeva is three meters away from you in the toilet when you were shouting to her to call the police, and she never uttered a word?” he asked in a mocking tone. “She would be scared, she would shout out and talk to you. You are in the same room.”

But Pistorius claimed Steenkamp would have been too afraid to answer.

“She would have perceived the danger was coming closer. She would have stayed quiet,” he said, crying. “I wish she had screamed out, let me know she was I there.”

Nel then accused the defendant of changing his story as he went along.

“I’m thinking of something that never happened and I’m trying to keep up,” he said, suggesting that was what was going through Pistorius’ head.

But the double amputee angrily denied the allegation.

“The state’s case has changed many times, mine has stayed the same,” he declared.

Nel then told Pistorius he was having trouble answering because he was “covering up a lie,” causing Pistorius to burst into tears.

“This is the night I lost the person I cared about. I don’t know why people don’t understand that,” he wailed.

Pistorius, charged with premeditated murder, faces 25 years to life if convicted. Judge Thokozile Masipa will decide the case because South Africa has no jury system.